The ANWR landscape: a geographical analysis of rhetoric and representation

For over 40 years now, a remote piece of land in the northeast corner of Alaska has been the focus of a highly publicized and extremely controversial debate. This contested landscape, known as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), is valued for its striking vistas and unique wildlife as well a...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Moyer, Jessica Renee
Format: Text
Language:unknown
Published: Western Washington University 2008
Subjects:
Online Access:https://dx.doi.org/10.25710/5ggn-9e82
https://cedar.wwu.edu/wwuet/15
id ftdatacite:10.25710/5ggn-9e82
record_format openpolar
spelling ftdatacite:10.25710/5ggn-9e82 2023-05-15T15:12:22+02:00 The ANWR landscape: a geographical analysis of rhetoric and representation Moyer, Jessica Renee 2008 https://dx.doi.org/10.25710/5ggn-9e82 https://cedar.wwu.edu/wwuet/15 unknown Western Washington University Text Masters Thesis article-journal ScholarlyArticle 2008 ftdatacite https://doi.org/10.25710/5ggn-9e82 2021-11-05T12:55:41Z For over 40 years now, a remote piece of land in the northeast corner of Alaska has been the focus of a highly publicized and extremely controversial debate. This contested landscape, known as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), is valued for its striking vistas and unique wildlife as well as for its substantial petroleum reserves. As a result, environmentalists and oil industries have long been engaged in heated debate over its land use and resource management, and in particular over whether or not the refuge should be drilled for oil. While these two national interest groups have dominated the public dispute, however, a much broader pool of actors with varied perspectives and priorities are heavily invested in and vigorously debating the issue as well, including two indigenous groups whose ancestors have resided within the refuge for thousands of years. In this thesis, I explore how environmentalists, oil industries, the Gwich'in Native Americans, who oppose drilling for oil, and the Iñupiat Eskimos, who support it, have constructed ANWR for policy-makers and the general public, both in contrast to one another and across 'for' and 'against' delineations. I also provide an in-depth and critical analysis of four prominent discursive themes employed by each of these stakeholders, which include society and nature, sovereignty and security, luxury versus livelihood, and past, preservation, and future. Through the above methodologies, I demonstrate that the values and perspectives of the native tribes share many similarities, despite the different conclusions to which they have ultimately led, whereas those of the national interest groups are polarizing and antagonistic. Further, a close examination of the various relationships between these four stakeholders reveals the imbalance of privilege and power that continues to fuel ANWR's "drilling debate". Text Arctic eskimo* Alaska DataCite Metadata Store (German National Library of Science and Technology) Arctic
institution Open Polar
collection DataCite Metadata Store (German National Library of Science and Technology)
op_collection_id ftdatacite
language unknown
description For over 40 years now, a remote piece of land in the northeast corner of Alaska has been the focus of a highly publicized and extremely controversial debate. This contested landscape, known as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), is valued for its striking vistas and unique wildlife as well as for its substantial petroleum reserves. As a result, environmentalists and oil industries have long been engaged in heated debate over its land use and resource management, and in particular over whether or not the refuge should be drilled for oil. While these two national interest groups have dominated the public dispute, however, a much broader pool of actors with varied perspectives and priorities are heavily invested in and vigorously debating the issue as well, including two indigenous groups whose ancestors have resided within the refuge for thousands of years. In this thesis, I explore how environmentalists, oil industries, the Gwich'in Native Americans, who oppose drilling for oil, and the Iñupiat Eskimos, who support it, have constructed ANWR for policy-makers and the general public, both in contrast to one another and across 'for' and 'against' delineations. I also provide an in-depth and critical analysis of four prominent discursive themes employed by each of these stakeholders, which include society and nature, sovereignty and security, luxury versus livelihood, and past, preservation, and future. Through the above methodologies, I demonstrate that the values and perspectives of the native tribes share many similarities, despite the different conclusions to which they have ultimately led, whereas those of the national interest groups are polarizing and antagonistic. Further, a close examination of the various relationships between these four stakeholders reveals the imbalance of privilege and power that continues to fuel ANWR's "drilling debate".
format Text
author Moyer, Jessica Renee
spellingShingle Moyer, Jessica Renee
The ANWR landscape: a geographical analysis of rhetoric and representation
author_facet Moyer, Jessica Renee
author_sort Moyer, Jessica Renee
title The ANWR landscape: a geographical analysis of rhetoric and representation
title_short The ANWR landscape: a geographical analysis of rhetoric and representation
title_full The ANWR landscape: a geographical analysis of rhetoric and representation
title_fullStr The ANWR landscape: a geographical analysis of rhetoric and representation
title_full_unstemmed The ANWR landscape: a geographical analysis of rhetoric and representation
title_sort anwr landscape: a geographical analysis of rhetoric and representation
publisher Western Washington University
publishDate 2008
url https://dx.doi.org/10.25710/5ggn-9e82
https://cedar.wwu.edu/wwuet/15
geographic Arctic
geographic_facet Arctic
genre Arctic
eskimo*
Alaska
genre_facet Arctic
eskimo*
Alaska
op_doi https://doi.org/10.25710/5ggn-9e82
_version_ 1766343059100925952